Walled in
In the opinion of several writers in the Israeli press, the wall of separation was a big mistake, notes Emad Gad
Developments in Israel's separation wall were the subject of intensive coverage this week in the Israeli media. The proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the testimonies of various nations and organisations sparked heated debate in the press between the wall's supporters and opponents.
It was clear from Israeli press coverage that the Sharon government made several mistakes in the matter of the wall. It not only built it but it claimed no political considerations were involved. It scorned the ICJ while at the same time it waffled between boycotting the court and refusing to participate in the proceedings, and rising to the urgency of the occasion.
The controversy over the wall in the Israeli media broached several aspects of the issue. Firstly, the Israeli government was extremely contemptuous of criticisms of the wall, certain that the US would support any decision it made. Thus, the Sharon government stated that the wall was being constructed purely for security considerations with the objective of preventing Palestinian suicide operations. The government did not care to respond to inquiries as to why, if the wall was built simply for security, did it not conform to the borders recognised prior to 5 June 1967. That is, why did it not follow the Green Line separating Israel from the West Bank?
The second aspect of the debate was Israel's disdain for the ICJ. Having grown used to violating international law and considering itself above that law, Israel underestimated the significance of the ICJ case and did not prepare itself to counter the testimonies of various nations. This was clear in the Sharon government's decision to boycott the proceedings, followed by its decision to go on the offensive against the court, focussing on the participation of an Egyptian judge. Israel submitted a request asking that the judge be removed but the ICJ refused. It then decided to intensify the Israeli civic presence in The Hague in an attempt to affect the proceedings.
Ofer Shelah addressed the issue in an article for Yediot Aharonot entitled, "Because they are all against us." "Only three weeks ago, it would have been difficult to find anyone who was interested about discussions over the wall at the ICJ," Shelah wrote. "The professional team that was preparing for the discussion worked in virtual secrecy -- not because of the confidential nature of the topic but because no-one was interested. In this context a decision was made almost in passing to boycott the court proceedings without anyone bothering to even study the decision ... and then what a surprise: no sooner than the court proceedings began did it start to seem that there was nothing more important."
The third dimension to the case is the Israeli government's continued use of the anti-Semitism card against anyone at the proceedings who contradicts the Israeli viewpoint. Some Israeli writers wrote that global anti-Semitism had become the government's weapon of choice to confront political failures. "The sense that the entire world is against us and that those who hate us are everywhere is the main prop used by the Israeli leadership," wrote Shelah. "In addition, the sense that all the evils of the world, from Cuba to Indonesia, have come together particularly for the purpose of attacking any Israeli act only reinforces the deep-rooted experience that we stand alone and, therefore, we are right."
The fourth aspect of the discussion is seen in the crystallisation of a trend in Israel that recognises it was a mistake to build the wall and that the Israeli government erred in its management of the issue internationally. "But the two walls -- the security wall and the political wall -- both built to please the settlers, guaranteed we would find ourselves in a fix, both politically and financially (even so, it was and remains the duty of the government to protect the lives of the settlers until the end)," wrote Eitan Haber in Yediot Aharonot in an article entitled "Dismantling". "Now, after the whole world is against us, they are trying to solve the dilemma of dismantling the walls and building new walls and getting us out of this mess that wise men would not have created in the first place. It all reminds me of the 1988 elections. During the electoral campaign, several reservist generals from the Labour Party (Yanoush Ben-Gal, Uri Or, Nati Sharoni, Motta Gur, Haim Bar-Lev) proposed building a wall along the Green Line. What shall we tell them today? The idea was treated as the joke of the season. Everyone laughed and asked them, 'Have you gone nuts? Shall we who have split the atom, who went all the way to Entebbe, now go back to the Green Line?'"
"Never mind that the wall itself is a subject of legitimate discussion on several fronts, include its efficacy, its path, and the degree to which it draws de facto political borders," wrote Shelah in the aforementioned article. "Never mind that the wall's construction was doomed to failure given the absence of real decision- making and political wrangling, which at their apex led to the dismantling of several kilometres of the wall just as the ICJ discussions drew near. Never mind that several respected American spokespeople are opposed to different aspects of the wall. The moment that the UN-affiliated ICJ comes in, the discussion is over. All of us become Chaim Herzog condemning the equivalence of Zionism to racism. All of us become Ben-Gurion proclaiming that our destiny does not depend on what Gentiles say but on what Jews do. We are all against the world -- and how important it is that the whole world be against us."
Following the debate in the Israeli media, there is a clear sense that the cause is already lost. Whatever the court decides, the Palestinian motion and the words spoken by representatives from several non-Arab countries before the court were tantamount to a trial of Israel as a rogue state that violates all internationally binding obligations in occupying nations. It is also clear that several writers and journalists in Israel have come to believe that constructing the wall was a mistake and that the government mismanaged the whole affair.
It appears that ultimately the proceedings at The Hague will be a shock to Israel, for both the political and intellectual elite. The anti-Semitism weapon has been of no use, nor has US pressure helped Israel avoid an international trial or appear as a rogue nation in the eyes of the world.
To follow the details about the controversy over the wall in the Israeli media, visit Arabs Against Discrimination online at www.aad-online.org.
